Millionaires living on the doorstep of Buckingham Palace have helped block plans for a luxury hotel because they say their posh postcode is already being overrun with rough sleepers, tramps, tourists, rubbish and rats.

On Tuesday, January 8, Westminster City councillors ignored planning advice and refused the request to revamp the Grade-II listed buildings at 4-5 Buckingham Gate which sold for a reported £30m last year.

Cofingham Ltd had applied for permission to demolish the office buildings, while keeping the historic facades, and transform it into a 53-room luxury hotel, complete with a restaurant, bar, swimming pool, spa and fitness area, and a rooftop pavilion.

The frontage of 4-5 Buckingham Gate which was formerly Met Police Offices (Image: Westminster City Council planning documents)

But the application was met with spirited opposition from put-out residents of Buckingham Gate and Stafford Place who wrote to the council expressing their anger.

They also claimed service vehicles and cabs going back and forth would add to the crowds in the busy Buckingham Palace tourism spot.

Read More

The chairman of Stafford Mansions Residents' Association writing on behalf of 30 residents claimed growing numbers of hotels and other recent developments in the area were already causing "uncontrolled noise, dirt, rubbish, tramps, homeless people sleeping outside, peeing all over, rats, delivery crates, rubbish bins overflowing etc, every single day."

Others complained there was already a residents' parking squeeze in the area.

Buckingham Palace, which was a stone's throw from the planned hotel site (Image: Dominic Lipinski/PA Wire)

Buckingham Gate's proximity to the Palace meant it was already often "swollen with tourist coaches and clogged up with traffic and crowds," added another resident, saying more hotels would not help.

The Westminster Society's representative also objected on the grounds that the number of hotels in the area was "approaching saturation" and echoing locals' concerns about the area's residential character.

Read More

Summing up, he said while councillors thought it looked like a nice hotel, they judged its location to be in conflict with Westminster's planning policies for protecting residential areas, and agreed with residents that service vehicles would overload narrow streets.

Cllr Timothy Barnes said he regretting having to vote to reject the application, explaining he agreed with residents and thought it was a "welcome building but in the wrong place."